tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business January 23, 2018 12:00pm-2:00pm EST
stuart: big show including football. ashley: kentucky fried chicken. kfc you get it all on "varney." we say that we're not joking. we proved that today. stuart: well-said. two seconds to go. here is neil cavuto. neil: budget director of the united states with us right now. no doubt happy we have the three-day shutdown behind us. ironies of ironies, all the bashing he got when he was brought up for the budget director post by nancy pelosi. he was the orchestrator of government shutdowns which is a big mistake. we know what transpired since. we know the role nancy pelosi and chuck schumer played in that shutdown. curious to get his views. they have a couple weeks to go to avoid potentially another one. what they're crafting now, daca, i immigration reform and.
they have three weeks to do it. reporter: you heard on stuart varney how do you craft this deal that might pass in the senate? it would also have to pass in the u.s. house of representatives. this is a tall order because already there is legislation in the house from representative goodlatte which is comprehensive immigration reform. that bill will not pass in the u.s. senate. already they're at odds, but the senate will go forward with people like lindsey graham, susan collins, dick durbin to figure out a deal. let's see what president trump says for sure. he says, no knows for sure they will be able to reach a deal by february 8th. with a biggs additional focus on put on military strength and border security. the dems have just herned that a shutdown is not the answer. marc short even put it this way. >> we laid out very specifically
what our priorities and principles were. again a few weeks back we refined that list to be a little more careful an specific on exactly the four pillars we've been asking for, fix daca, handle border security and chain migration and visa lottery program. we were making significant progress before the shutdown. i think we can resume that and pick it up quickly. reporter: neil. the people to watch this again are dick durbin and lindsey graham. neil: maybe this next fellow. adam shapiro. head of management and budget, mick mulvaney. >> neil, thanks for having me on the show. neil: i remember your own nomination process. i remember nancy pelosi at the time saying, sir, he is willing to hold the full faith and credit of united states of america hostage. radical agenda, totally unsuited to be director of omb. do you think those word came back to haunt her. >> let's say i look forward to going through mrs. pelosi's nomination process for whatever
omb position she wants in the future. i voted against a funding bill. she voted against a funding bill. silly that is came up in the confirmation. that's fine. we're glad the government is open today. we still have very little idea what the democrats were trying to do when they tried to shut the government down on friday. everybody admits, if you look the way democrats voted yesterday. 30 of them voted for the same bill essentially they voted against on friday. so it was a great deal of dissent inside that democratic caucus. i don't know why they should it down on friday but they did. it is open now. we get a chance to talk about other issues including i am my sprayings. neil: do you think cooler heads, whether you want to say the democrats blinked this time or back in 2013 republicans that blinked, using threat of a government shutdown, it is just not worth it. >> what i think it says there was a great deal of dissent in the democratic caucus. there is article today about
continued fissures in the group. they're under a great deal of pressure from the left-wing. there is another sort of analogy with what happened in 2013. republicans were criticized for coming under pressure from the tea party right. i think what you're seeing now the same sort of at least, similar dynamic within the democrat party. it is elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, kamala harris wing of the party putting pressure to not do anything with the president. it got resolved this weekend. how it goes forward remains to be seen. neil: we're a few weeks away being tested again on the exact same issue. what do you think? >> probably a little bit tighter than that everyone talks about the fact there is 18 days. i think the house will be here for six 1/2, seven of those. one is set aside for the state of the union next week. it will be very, very tight schedule. that is why when it was originally flowed doing, five or six or seven day extension, that was simply meaningless because nothing could get done in that
amount of time. there i will was tight time frame. there is no question. neil: do we have to revisit how this stuff was done, director? your concern was everything they do, they do late. when you do things late, if you are like a lot of folks in college, scrambling to get a term paper done, results end up showing that it can be a tentative half-assed approach. we always do this we always are late. why is that? >> i never tire the of analogy of my teenage triplets and congress, same mentality on other things. what this is posing it the fact that the appropriations spending process is broken. that is boring to folks and really driving all of this why we go from precipice to precipice, a single appropriations bill. they are supposed to pass 12 every year. if they don't change 60-vote rule, at least make senators talk a filibuster.
now they don't have to work to filibuster a bill. not like it used to be like when we saw "mr. smith goes to washington." it is too easy to make a filibuster in the senate. spending bills never pass. for that reason you go from shutdown crisis, shutdown crisis. they need to fix it in the senate. it is their rules. only they can fix that. neil: the president indicated as much, you get rid of the filibuster thing, simple majority. others like mitch mcconnell seem intimating, not so fast, if democrats take over you would rue the day. >> that is why making them talk is sort of a happy medium. won't change to it 50 votes. senator mcconnell said that again and again and again. he probably knows his body fairly well but there is no excuse for not making senators work and talk a filibuster. senator murphy did it couple years ago regarding gun control because it was important to him. senator rand paul did it couple years ago how we treat citizens overseas because it was important to him. you shouldn't filibuster to go to fund-raiser or filibuster to
watch a football game. if you filibuster you should be on the floor working and powerful room and those rules need to change. neil: ted cruz did both. >> that is exactly the way to do it. neil: he shut the down the government with no chance affordable care act that a sitting democratic president would allow it. it is waste of time. >> i've been on both sides of shutdown argument. being on winning side of a shutdown is a lot more satisfying. neil: where are we right now on the next big wave? president is going to davos. he is gearing up for infrastructure, that sort of thing potentially bipartisan support. are you worried after this whole dust-up there isn't going to be much bipartisan support? >> yes and no. i mean it is easy i think to say with, with senator schumer, we now shutdown schumer talking about negotiating with the president negotiating jell-o, that tend to chill future
negotiations. the fact of the matter is this is transactional sort of town. while folks could have gone head-to-head on the last bill, there is chance they can sit down to work together on the next one. daca is something the president wants to work on. immigration is something he is committed to fixing. we can get bipartisan support for comprehensive immigration not just daca and things you mentioned lead in to the show and there is bipartisan support for infrastructure. as rough as things have been last couple weeks, the president continues to negotiate on couple big items. i hope you see progress very shortly. neil: what about the mood in the house behind you, sir? we're learning that attorney general jeff session was questioned for several hours by former fbi director mueller, a part of this ongoing russia probe, some have likened it to a siege mentality or paranoia building up there. how would you describe it? >> i read the same art cycles. i saw a reference to "vanity
fair." i don't know who talks to "vanity fair" that the chief son the outs. i look around, are those folk talking to people that work here? there is no siege mentality. there is no dis, disruption in the system. the chief is running a great shop. we managed a really good shutdown to the effect you can manage a shutdown properly. not saying we wanted it. the president didn't want it. i didn't want it. we managed it extraordinarily well. the monuments were open. more of the government was open in 2016 than '13. we were ready to manage a long-term shutdown if need be. the government was functioning properly as run by the trump administration. that is not, you don't get that if there is a bunch of discord within building behind me. things are hitting all eight cylinders. we're pleased where they are. we had a great year in 2017. continued to believe there was political motivation to the shutdown. to deprive the president with a
one-year anniversary victory lap. we had a good behind us, looking forward to good year in 2018 as well. neil: director, somebody is yapping to somebody, right? >> i came from the house where everybody yaps to everybody. that is the nature of washington, d.c. all i can tell you someone there, i'm in this building every single day, sometimes more than once a day. i'm in the oval office with the president, chief's office, meeting with chief of staff, other senior staff. i'm a strange role cabinet member and role of the senior white house staff. the place is functioning just fine. we're very proud of the works we did over the past weekend. could never have accomplish what we did without having everybody functioning as a team. neil: you know the markets of course, a little soft today sir, but the fact of the matter they have been on fire ever since the president's election certainly. since his inauguration. tax cuts looking forward to them with big reason, long before that easing up on regulations. a lot of folks seem to think a lot of revenue is coming into
washington to more than pay for. others are saying it won't pan out, people start seeing net in paycheck next month, they will be disappointed. it will come back to boomerang on you. what do you say? >> not at all. we expect the exact opposite. we're so excited, neil, about the structural changes we made. this is not a sugar high. this is not a estimate -- stimulus. this is fundamental changes to the american economy. start with dereg. office of management and budget. with we made deregulation a economic priority. gdp growth before the tax bill passed. i'm absolutely convinced that was a large part in the response to the deregulatory agenda we have. you add to that this structural change to the tax code, not just a tax cut like president bush had in 2000. structural reform the way we tax creation of wealth this country. long term changes. these are fundamental principle
changes to the way that the country runs. we're excited about the possibilities for sustained long-term growth. so, yeah, the stock market is going up and down. clearly only gone up since we've been here. it will come down eventually. but in the long term we feel we made absolutely critical improvements to the american economy, that will prove economically for the administration but also for the administration. neil: director mulvaney, do you worry about the president mentioning stock market as such, good reason to, that old saw it can come back bite you. ronald reagan rarely ever ever talked about the markets even though they were running up. it served him well at time of '87 crash. markets finished his eight years a lot higher than they came in. do you advise the president, boss i would go slow on this it is self-explanatory, we see market averages just be careful? >> we spoke about it. comparison to the reagan breaks
down, the media was different. he can get a fair shake from you and couple other outlets. itch been on other couple other networks, beating on president non-stop. neil: i caught one of those. >> 90% of this president, 90% of the media coverage of this president has been negative since he took office. if he won't talk about his own successes practically no one else will. neil: i didn't want to jump on you there -- what is apparent with ronald reagan, his tax cuts, both of them, early '80s one and '86 one were ripped by the media at the time. the view of people who saw their net paychecks, that changed everything, the sentiment changed. do you expect the same thing to happen with your tax cuts? >> not just that. i mean look, we didn't even expect the christmas bonuses that went out. we didn't expect that the minimum wage increases from large employers across the country. that is more than we expected. we think we you know promised on tax reform and impacts that we
have with the economy. we're confident when folks see their check, not only take home check we think they will be pleased with, when opportunities come in. they start to realize what it means to be part of a healthy american economy. when they have a chance to change jobs. when they have a chance to start their own business. when they have a chance to get a raise, when those filter through, those won't be immediate in february like the new with holding will, when people remember being part of a healthy american economy, you and i talked about this before, i will say it until i'm blue in the face if you're 30 years old and watch this program you have never had a job this country with a really healthy american economy. there are things that happen in dynamic american economy that can't happen anywhere else in the world. we create wealth not seen in the history of the planet. we create wealth for folks like you and me on tv and folks that don't get near television home taking care of their families. wealth opportunities that exist in this nation are fantastic. we feel like we unleashed those.
put ourselves in a position to allow the country to unleash this type of wealth creation. that is what folks see between now and midterm elections and well beyond that we're very optimistic about what the long-term future holds. neil: do you think people will appreciate that bit midterm elections and keep republicans in power? >> yeah. look, people may not like the president's methods, i get that you can't argue with the policies. you can't argue with the outcomes. people are better off, the country is bert off. neil: surprised with the markets and economy, director, his polling numbers just aren't great. >> i come back to the fact things are different when it comes to the media. neil: yeah. >> nine out of 10 chance hearing a nasty story about the president when you go on television, listen to the radio, go on the internet that can wear on you after a while. we can ask the question are you better off than a year ago, the answer is yes. there is one reason for that. donald trump. neil: director mulvaney, good seeing you, sir, thank you very much.
>> thanks, neil. neil: burn jet director of these united states joining us from the white house. the fallout from that. the dow down 23 points. we'll have more after this. oh, the things we do rising before dawn. sweating it out. driving ourselves to do more. be more. tough to make time for it all. but we can always find time to listen. to great thinkers, and fearless explorers. whose stories fuel our minds... and imaginations. stories that take us places our hamstrings alone can't. all we have to do is listen.
open your ears to the largest selection of audiobooks from the world's most inspiring voices. download audible today. every truck guy has their own way of conveying powerful. yeeaaahhh boy. kind of looks like a monster coming to eat ya. holy smokes. that is awesome. strong. you got the basic, and you got the beefy. i just think it looks mean. incredible. no way. start your year off strong a new chevy truck. get a total value of over $9,600 on this silverado all star when you finance with gm financial. find new roads at your local chevy dealer.
shouldn't it all just be one thing? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you can get 5 lines of talk and text included at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. choose by the gig or unlimited. and ask how to get a $150 prepaid card when you buy a new lg x charge. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com
neil: but are you worried after this whole dust-up there isn't going to be much bipartisan support? >> yes and no. i mean it is easy i think to say with a, you know, with senator schumer, we now call him shutdown schumer negotiating with the president being like negotiating with jell-o that tends to chill future negotiations but the fact of the matter is this is transactional sort of town. while folks could have gone head-to-head on the last bill, there is chance they can sit down to work together on the next one. daca is something the president wants to work on. immigration is something he is committed to fixing. we think we get bipartisan support for comprehensive immigration reform. not just daca, border security, the other things we mentioned into the lead-in into the show. beyond that bit partisan support for struck -- for infrastructure. the president continueses to negotiate on a couple of big items we hope to see progress shortly. neil: budget director mulvaney
says after they cool down hopes they can get the daca immigration deal done, in less than three weeks to get it done and of course infrastructure. there were a lot of choice words exchanged back and forth on both sides. uba center for politics, multiple best-selling author, larry sabato. how likely is that? time's awasting? >> there is a decent possibility there will come to agreement not shutting the government again but probably money for the border wall and safety for the "dreamers," that would be the logical compromise. maybe some other christmas tree ornaments thrown on there to make it attractive to certain key members. infrastructure, you know, that's, that's awfully optimistic, let's put it that way. this is an election year, neil. this is an election year. both parties tend to act in their own self-interests from the word go. neil: no i think you're right about that we were recounting
the tax cut and impact, that is the budget director where that will go and we are noticing some improving poll numbers on the tax cut and people more favorably disposed to it than they were in the beginning, similar to ronald reagan's initial tax cut that was panned in the media, but then as people started seeing it for themselves liked it. of course that was phased in and because it was phased in the midterms that year republicans lost a lot of seats. what are you envisioning now? this is all media, nothing is delayed. possibly the republicans could come out of potential poll rut they're in? >> they could. you want to see what president trump's approval rating is obviously because in a midterm election that is one of the critical factors. i could see him gradually increasing his numbers if people really like the tax cut bill once it starts affecting them and it should start in february
as we understand it. they should see more money, at least more people should see a bit more money in their accounts. we'll see whether that actually is true and who benefits but that is their best shot, neil and they know it. they have got to emphasize says that. they have got to say we helped you time to help us. don't give majority to the democrats in the house or the senate. they will have to play those cards and see if it is enough to hold the house and the senate. neil: are you surprised what companies are doing, larry, in that, some of them, maybe because of the curse of riches their taxes went down so much benefit immediate expensing, one-time tax holiday, bring billions home in apple's case, encourage to invest hundreds of billions of dollars next 10 years, whether that is all the tax cut we can debate that but a lot of companies doing the same thing. three million americans getting some bonus, some benefits. utility customers getting rebate
as a result, this is factor maybe democrats didn't consider when they unanimously voted against it and it could come back to bite them? >> i doubt it was considered because people in organizations and companies make lots of promises that they don't always deliver. in this case they have been delivering. there were tax reasons for them doing what they did before the end of 2017. >> absolutely. >> now that we're in 2018 they're doing it for other reasons. some of them ad least did promise to do this ahead of the tax bill. so they have fulfilled those promises. they have to continue to do so because public memory is so short. good reason, loads and loads of things happen every week. they have to drive them that message. republicans seem confident they will do it. they will have a lot of money that campaign accounts getting message across using tv
advertising and other forms of advertising. neil: director mulvaney revealed something interesting to me in our brief chat that the president always talking up the stock market. ronald reagan, you're historian extraordinaire here, was leery of doing that sort of thing. most presidents are, whatever they're praising could reverse on them and make them look like fools. this president pound the theme. it is certainly the wind at his back. what did you think of mulvaney saying, sometimes maybe, i don't want to put words in his mouth but be careful? >> i was interested in that answer, neil because he, i expected him to say, no, no i never discuss that. the president knows exactly what he's doing but i think a lot of republican political consultants and maybe republican members of congress and so on are a little wary of this because what goes up will come down. the stock market at some point will have a correction. yes, it has been a tremendous run-up. it would be hard for any president not to comment on it, but to comment on it constantly, the video bits to string
together in ads, and all those tweets about it, i think it would be better to stress the overall economy is improving rather than hanging your hat on the stock market itself. neil: all right. larry, always good seeing you, my friend. thank you very, very much. >> thank you, neil. neil: larry sabato. you know something that could rain on that market parade is talk that the president wants to slam some tariffs on some big foreign entities, namely in asia like south korea and china. if the president gets his way on a lot of south korean washing machines and driers, a 50% tariff. so if you're looking to get a 300-dollar, i don't know washer or drier, how does $450 sound? how does strayed war sound? how about maybe end to this whole rally sound? after this.
neil: all right. everything that people are talking about now that last week, attorney general jeff sessions was interviewed by robert mueller's team. we don't know what came of that. we do know it lasted for several hours. to blake burman at the white house with more. reporter: hi, neil, consequential, because this is the first time a cabinet member inside of the trump administration interviewed but robert mueller's team. attorney general jeff session, department of justice officials telling fox the interview took place with the mueller team at some point last week and it lasted several hours. at issue likely the firing of former fbi director jim comey which sessions had a direct role in and whether or not president engaged in any form of obstruction of justice. the white house this morning not really getting into any of this but they did give sessions the vote of confidence. >> attorney general sessions is continuing his work. the president has confidence in attorney general sessions and the work that he is doing. as we have said, we have cooperated fully in this
investigation. reporter: separately this morning as well the website axios reported that sessions had been pressure fbi director chris wray to fire the deputy director andrew mccabe who was drawn very public ire from president trump, but wray threatened to quit according to axios. the white house is also standing by the fbi director. >> president has put director wray in charge to look at those things and make those decisions. we have full confidence he is going to do exactly that. this is a man of great integrity that had a great deal of support from across the aisle, bipartisan support. reporter: neil, back to the mueller investigation. the white house also said earlier today number two in the press shop, raj shaw, they feel over here the mueller investigation will wrap up, quote, in short order. they reiterate once again there was no collusion. neil? neil: buddy, thank you very, very much. we raised this issue with mick
mulvaney, management budget director only to inchoir this is creating a sense of distraction, siege mentality at the white house. he says no. former press secretary for vice president mike pence, mark lauder and francesca chambers. what about the ongoing course of events, i understand that, but it has to rattle folks? >> certainly neil, as this very continues the white house has to keep talking about russia and the president has to keep saying in his hiss opinion there was no collusion, no collusion, no collusion. what potentially you could hear in the white house press briefing today, the questions don't necessarily get any easier. you see a lot of reporters asking about this immigration deal that senate democrats and senate republicans are working on. the fact we have spending agreement in place until february 8th but what comes next? what is the white house's plan at this point to keep another government shut down from happening or move past this
issue generally and move on to the rest of his agenda? neil: we know, mark, this went on for a few hours. of course course questions and back and forth, that can easily happen, but what do you read into that? >> i don't make much of it. i think mueller, he will talk to everybody he needs to talk to. at end of the day, you can add jeff sessions name to the list of people you talk to. there is still no evidence of any collusion from the trump campaign and russia. it is just more of the same, and you know, we're even seeing reports out there that one of the fbi agents that was doing the text-messaging, even admitted in a text message there wasn't much there there. so you know, it is more of a fishing expedition. we'll let the director go through to finish his work. neil: francesca, do you worry though this for the administration takes eye off not only the budget thing you alluded to but infrastructure,
some of this other stuff because people seize on this? what is the latest in the drama, et cetera? >> well the president will obviously have an opportunity with the state of the union address on january this to do a reset, neil. while that is not talked about much lately, not just because of the investigation you're referencing, but the budget deal you're talking about, certainly the president will lay out several things he wants to accomplish. that will not just include a immigration plan. that will include infrastructure i heard you talking about previously. includes welfare reform, both president trump and house republican leader, speaker paul ryan said they want to move on to. of course there could be some other surprises in there. i'm sure we hear more about the legislative agenda from the white house after the president completes his trip to switzerland. neil: no doubt that should be interesting, that trip alone. twice, thank you very, very much. news i want to pass along here. we're getting confirmation that the president will host french president macron in late april.
that is the first such state visit to the white us under the trump presidency. that tends to be a big of a fair. they get everyone for a black tie event at the white house. really something to watch. but anyway, the french president and his wife will be coming to us around the end of april. it will be a big deal. so macron is coming here! we'll have more after this. yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade.
...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. neil: you know, this is still a lot to digest. netflix has a market value now well north of $110 billion. $110 billion. remember a few years ago, pricing plan, everyone was piling on saying netflix screwed it up? that is no longer the case. there is a lot of sentiment what do they do with all the money? could it be on the hunt? could others be on the hunt for netflix? remember all the precious conflict if we have a michael nunez talking to us. we were talking during the
break. great to see you, my friend. >> yep. neil: this thing is on fire but where does it go from here? everybody says, someone wants content, netflix is the place to go but it would be pricey to buy? >> yeah. where netflix is trying to go into international markets. that is the thing they have successfully done. that is part of the reason you're seeing the stock price jump so well. they have turned their international subscriber base into a profitable business. that is actually a pretty big milestone for the company. so they will continue to sped tentacles across the word. they want to provide more content across the world, ultimately gain more subscribers. neil: no reason for them to be pursuing anyone? unless they want more content. they can create that on their own. >> diversify the revenue stream. they're entirely reliant on subscribers for revenue. there may be deals outside of that for -- neil: is there any pushback with the subscribers, you keep raising their monthly, right?
>> that is a huge question, right. also whether you can start to create content that doesn't cost quite as much. they're spending $8 billion annually on creating this content. things like "house of cards" and the will smith movie recently came out, "bright," those things cost a lot of money to make. whether that pays off the in long run is to be determined. neil: who would be able to buy them? >> exactly if you're a company like apple, you're trying to figure out your entertainment piece of that company, for a long time apple had itunes that was successful piece. but allure for that entryway for people to see shows and to see movies has kind of faded. so apple is being look for a way to get back into the conversation as a provider of entertainment and so if you're a company like apple, you have a bunch of cash saved up. you're looking at company like netflix that has solved this very complicated prompt.
first two, actually, do this globally, and such a large margin, i think it's a pretty attractive, it can be a pretty attractive business. neil: if you're netflix, and you're entertaining phone calls, what's to interest you in changing what has been a money making juggernaut that you don't have to do anything and next year at this time you could be worth $200 billion. >> that is taking a lot for granted. year-over-year there sin creasing more competition for netflix to take. obvious one is disney. they announced they will launch their own streaming service in the next year. that could potentially cut into netflix, netflix revenue stream, into the fact that people will want, people with kids will want to have those disney shows and disney movies on demand and consider subscribing to that type of service.
so far, netflix really only had to fend off startups and a couple other tech companies. now they are going up against other media conglomerates. companies like disney and like twentieth century fox and people behind hulu for example, are going to, going to create more competition in this space. there is going to be more and more content as we're seeing with things like amazon prime and so things like "house of cards" won't be quite so so, so unusual. they will not be quite so special when you have dozens of competitors creating high-quality content superior to something like youtube or like facebook live. of course anyone can broadcast and create a show and put something on line, but for it to be high quality you need a lot of money. the studios are working hard to produce this for the internet at this point. so you know, netflix had a white open field to create house of cards, create other successful shows.
neil: i heard they took a 40 million-dollar hit with "house of cards" and kevin spacey. >> i heard that reported. neil: are they going to kill him off? >> they will continue the show. he could be in prison of the a lot of ways to solve that storyline. "house of cards" is not enough to keep hundreds of millions to people coming back. it is not quite as popular abroad. this show existed abroad prior to coming to the u.s. things like that you know, that success are going to be harder to replicate going forward. they will have more people going after the same exact objective, people like disney and twentieth century fox. neil: i didn't realize there are quite a few in this people. michael is the mashable deputy director. more after this.
♪ neil: socal fornash lawmakers are very eager to get their hot little hands on federal largess from tax cuts for companies and everything else. hillry vaughn from. what are they trying to do, hillary? reporter: some democrats want to take half of president trump's tax cut away from businesses to spend on state-run programs.
they say it will help middle and low income families. republicans i talked to this will only supercharge the max exodus of companies already fleeing that overtaxed and overregulated state. >> clearly they're trying to make a political statement but, there are real consequences to these proposals. real people are affected. jobs are on the line. reporter: the proposal headed to the assembly floor this spring would have members charging any company making a million dollars in income, an additional 10% tax on top of what they're already paying. the two democrats proposing idea, assemblyman ting and mccarty, under their plans businesses are still benefiting from the massive tax cut, just half as much. the controversial bill could have real consequences for companies based in the golden state already passed down benefits from trump's tax cut to their employees. one of those companies, apple ceo tim cook announced last week their employees are getting 2500
stock bonus. wells fargo headquartered in san francisco announced pay wages for hourly employees in san francisco, not just corporations that would feel the blow of 10% surcharge. small businesses and micro businesses in the state, any company making more than $3.5 million would also feel the blow from this tax cut. one republican assembly member says this bill isn't even necessary because the state government already has $20 billion of taxpayer fund, surplus of that in their covers. he says this doesn't even need to happen. neil? neil: i'm no lawyer, i even question whether it is legal to do that but, i'm sure you will keep a close eye on it, hillary, thank you very, very, very much. meanwhile billionaire donor, you might have heard of him, steve cohen, he is actually placing his bets on the grand ol' party, with a lot of grand ol' cash. charlie gasparino -- >> i'm blown away by the last
report. neil: do you believe that? we'll take half your tax riches. >> not just rich companies. small businesses. neil: everybody. if you want to tax them, tax them. say go ahead, uphill fight. you have dibs on half the federal tax cut. >> a lot of crazy stuff happens in california, the hippie movement, all that add this to the list. neil: i don't even know if it is legal, what about mr. cohen? >> when you think of major gop fund raisers i think of sheldon adelson. bernie marcus is up there. ken langone another guy up there, both home depot cofounders. neil: sheldon is in casino. >> sheldon is in the casino business. the name coming up right now is kind of interesting, steve cohen the hedge fund impresario, if you remember three or four years ago the feds were targeting him for insider trading charges. they shut down his hedge fund. charged his hedge fund with
criminal insider trading. negative charged him. securities & exchange commission commission brought a civil charge later got dropped. some. people involved in that case, failure to supervise case. some of the people he allegedly failed to supervise actually got off. their cases got overturned. meanwhile he is coming back to the hedge fund business. this guy is always pretty secretive. aside from buying expensive art and insider trading allegations you don't really see that much about him but now we're running the numbers. this guy is emerging one of the top gop fund-raisers, particularly now giving money to mitch mcconnell's super-pac. mitch mcconnell has a super-pac designed, he is senate majority leader, to keep the senate in republican hands. here is steve cohen giving something like $2 million to this pac. neil: really? >> last year he gave 250,000. neil: to keep the senate republican. >> yeah. you have got to ask yourself, why does he, why does he think keeping senate in republican hands, why has he made -- this guy in the past gave plenty to
democrats. he was anomaly according to people i talk to was a democrat even though he is billionaire. he may have had a political awakening, supply-side econmics all of sudden he believes in that he also may be placing his bets with the gop in terms of their deregulatory agenda. the justice department under president obama went after him tooth and nail on insider trading. basically tried to indict him, put him in jail as long as they could. it didn't happen. he now as you can see placing his bet with republicans who will take a much laxer, less, more hand off sort of approach to regulation, particularly, probably insider trading which will come under the auspice of the u.s. attorney. neil: anything in the house? that is where the battle could prove to be? >> yeah, he gave, we do have the numbers. do we have the numbers what he gave to the house? we should put them up there. not as much, million dollars.
neil: all bets are off house changes hands. you will have hearing. >> you could have insider trading hearings. he gave more to the senate. but he has given significant amount to a house committee that is essentially a house pac that is essentially same thing. so, it is fascinating. i never thought i would see steve cohen up there with sheldon adelson and bern my marcus. neil: what are the smart money guys saying? are they worried, resigned to republicans losing the house or is some of them saying wait a minute, we see this, impact of these tax cuts, improving economy, we'll register and resonate, nothing delayed on the tax package, all immediate, time for republicans to hold on to the house? >> there are a couple separate conversations. even democratic ones on wall street and in the banking business they're starting to love donald trump just on the deregulatory again today. you hear this through comments made by jamie dimon, who has been, nominally a democrat, you
know, but he despised the obama regulatory agenda which targeted banks as evillest monsters in the world. went after jamie and his bank, paid billions of dollars in fines, a lot which he believed he didn't deserve. now these same democratic wall street executives love the trump deregulation agenda. now in terms of congress, they are worried about losing both houses. and you see them stepping up. neil: i don't think it will happen. >> might not happen of the they will try to prevent it. neil: if i'm wrong, of course we burn the tape of this. >> you don't think it is going to happen. okay. i don't think it might happen. i don't think it might not happen. neil: a little dismissive. >> i don't think it might not happen. neil: insight you can't get anywhere else.
all depends on your point of view. lease the glc300 for $449 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. every day we hear from families who partnered with a senior living advisor from a place for mom to help find the perfect place for their mom or dad thank you so much for your assistance in helping us find a place. mom feels safe and comfortable and has met many wonderful residence and staffers. thank you for helping our family find our father a new home. we especially appreciate the information about the va aid and attendance program. i feel i found the right place. a perfect fit. you were my angel and helped guide me every step of the way thank you. the senior living advisors at a place for mom partner with thousands of families every month, listening and offering local knowledge and advice to help find the best senior living communities across the country and it won't cost you a cent.
this is a free service. call today. a place for mom. you know your family. we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. my "business" was going nowhere... so i built this kickin' new website with godaddy. building a website in under an hour is easy! 68% of people... ...who have built their website using gocentral, did it in... ...under an hour, and you can too. type in your business or idea. pick your favourite design. personalize it with beautiful images. and...you're done! and now business is booming. harriet, it's a double stitch not a cross stitch! build a better website - in under an hour. free to try. no credit card required. gocentral from godaddy. show of hands. let's get started. who wants customizable options chains? ones that make it fast and easy to analyze and take action? how about some of the lowest options fees? are you raising your hand? good then it's time for power e*trade
the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. e*trade. the original place to invest online. . neil: all right, the government shutdown is over, but we could be revisiting this in a few weeks. budget director mick mulvaney telling me a short time ago, it's the senate, the way things are done or not done that's the problem. i know when you were in congress, concern was everything they do, they do late. when you do things late, if you're like a lot of folks in college or scrambling to get a term paper done or study for an exam, the results end up showing it can be a tentative half-assed approach. we always do, this we always are late. why is this? >> never tire of the analogy between triplets and congress, the mentality on a lot of
things, what this is exposing is the fact the appropriations, the spending process is broken. i know that's boring to folks but it really is what's driving all of this and why we go from precipice to precipice is the senate cannot pass a senate appropriations bill. they're supposed to pass 12 every single year. if they don't want to change the 60 vote rule, they could make the senators talk a filibuster. they don't have to work to filibuster a bill, it's not like it used to be years ago when we saw mr. smith goes to washington. too easy to make a filibuster in the senate. for that reason, spending bills never pass and you go from shutdown crisis to shutdown crisis. they need to fix it, they're their rules, they need to fix that. neil: mulvaney adding his name to that of the president of the united states and others at the white house saying stop the filibuster, make it a simple majority rule in the senate. we'll get cruising on things. mitch mcconnell not keen on
doing that and republicans have concerns because it could be just a matter of time before democrats are in charge and they'll be blocked out on pretty much anything going with the simple majority. colorado republican senator corey gardner on that. what do you think of that? the whole filibuster thing? the president, the budget director saying simple majority. >> if you look at the senate over the past 100 years it's changed dramatically. filibuster was rarely used, filibuster on motion to proceed is fairley used and certainly being abused this past weekend which led to a shutdown of the federal government unnecessarily. so i think it's behavior number one, and number two, we have to start looking at ways we can make this body function again, if that means eliminating the filibuster on the motion to proceed to get onto legislation, i think that's something that this chamber needs to consider. neil: you know, the rapids i said from the outset, be careful what you wish for, you might get it. and all of a sudden in the
minority and not getting anything? >> it's a big question. in fact, i've had a lot of conversations with colleagues about this. some who five years ago were absolutely opposed to changing it. some who have seen the behavior support changing it now and others figure out where they are. we have to look at the speed of the executive branch and keep up with them in the pays of legislation today and what needs to change in order to make sure the legislative branch can respond to a modern government and should we be able to block even debating legislation? neil: switching gears, i would be interested in getting your take on attorney general jeff sessions talking to robert mueller on this russia probe. went on for a few hours last week. what do you think is going on there? i was raising it with director mulvaney, whether there is a sense of a siege mentality at the white house. what do you think? >> i don't think there's a sense of siege mentality. the white house is very clear they cooperated, that this is a sign of cooperation. this needs to be done fairly,
thoroughly and needs to be over and the american people need to be presented with the fact. they're reaching the conclusion to whatever it is. the fact you see the conversations means this investigation is going on. there's no siege. this is being done in a thoughtful manner. neil: do you know when you say it's going on, it's close to wrapping up? people far smarter than i, fine legal minds say when you're at that level and talking to the likes of jeff sessions, you are close to wrapping it up. i don't know, what are you hearing? >> that's the speculation they hear that these are some of the final conversations we've had. the american people need to get on with this business of getting the business completed, so this is part of the need to get the investigation done, the special prosecutor done, the special investigation done, so they get the facts have, it done and have it behind them. >> do you think there could be a bombshell announcement or a timing of one before the midterm election and that would be a problem? >> it would be hurtful for this
country if there were a bombshell announcement, particularly timed before the election. that's why i think this needs to be done sooner rather than later. and bombshells tend to be partisan and i'm concerned about so far. we need to make sure the investigation of congress stays nonpartisan. they have done a good job of that, but attempt to do anything around the election that makes people question what the intent of anything that was taking place. neil: talking about the shutdown fight that's resolved senator, people are looking what happens in a few weeks, something on daca, immigration reform, needs to be agreed to. maybe not. we could be revisiting all this in a few weeks, what do you think? >> i think i asked our 14-year-old daughter if she scooped the walk. we have 8" of snow. the next day in colorado, it's going to be 40 degrees and melt away. what we can't do and don't have the luxury of doing is waiting for something else to take care of the problem. that's not what we can do in congress, we have to fix the problem.
the president made it absolutely clear every time he's talked about the issue he wants the solution on daca. he laid out a four part agenda, border security issues, how do you address daca? chain migration? i've had multiple meetings about how to do it. if we do it, it has to be one way. enough support in the senate, in the house, to get on the president's desk and ultimately, you have to get that enough support and get the president to support it. if you do that, this is taken care of if. if you don't have support in and out of senate, it's not going to get passed. these are tough issues, everything we've talked about, the republican base have concerns over the issues. border security is very important. that may be less important to some other people, and it's going to be a give-and-take process, but at the end of the day, the four things the president laid out i believe need to be met, and if the president feels they haven't been, he's not going to sign it.
the goal is to address daca, to address the things the president has said and to get it signed into law so we can fix this. if it has that support in the house and the senate to do that, the president is going to. if he doesn't have, that he's not going to. this would be a waste of time if we can't get this accomplished. neil: very good seeing you, senator gardner, of the beautiful state of colorado. the real clear politics associate columnist emily, washington examiner, commentary writer among other things. a.b., where is this going? could we be revisiting this drama in a few weeks? >> of course. i think people listening to the spin over the weekend from both sides might have concluded that there is a big juicy steak on a platter and the democrats want to put a dollop of sauce on top and they were going to ruin a deal that was already ready. no. they have not reached the topline spending numbers, both
parties put this off. the republicans are focused on tax reform before business but didn't accomplish that. that is a huge deal, we're going to break the caps in the budget control act of 2011 that people remember is the sequester, that was meant to bring fiscal displan after a near default in the summer of 2011. that alone, senator thune, a republican leader said yesterday, may not be accomplished in the next three weeks. forget the controversy over immigration, they already have to deal with getting their numbers in order. something they can't agree to. neil: you know you talk about the caps and i always call them at the time emily to a.b.'s point, it was a backup back bone, if you couldn't get the will to change things, it's been violated or ignored or overruled or buried three different times and looks like we're on course to do it again. there will be a reckoning in
the financial markets, i don't know when that will be. we obviously are doing very well despite it. but you know, we're pushing it, aren't we? . >> that's the key is that for now, we're doing very well despite it, which, of course, doesn't create a lot of incentive to get done and fix it. a.b. is absolutely right. it's fair to call what's a reckoning. that's likely, they're barreling towards it. they don't have a lot of incentiveso dig down and do something. neil: one of the things i heard about, republicans at least beneath the surface, they are very happy with what companies are doing with the largesse they're getting from the tax cuts, much more than conveniently thought to be the case. the companies not only at their tax rate smashed down to 21 from 35% but begin expensing, nothing is delayed on that. one-time tax holiday to bring billions, trillions home from abroad, and a curse of riches. to be fair to them, they are sharing the wealth with lot of
workers, shareholders, in the case of utilities and customers and republicans are telling me that is an element of this that has not been appreciated and will help republicans in the polls come november. what do you think? >> right, well, they have already seen increase in support in polling for the tax reform plan, it was dismal in december into january, but definitely begun to turn. what that will do to translate into some meaningful pushback for republicans against what looks like a building democratic wave, we're going to have to look at obviously in august and september when voters make up their minds. >> i could be out to lunch and i will burn this tape if i am. i don't think it's going to happen. i think republicans will lose seats in the house, maybe a couple of others. i don't see, it and maybe the tax thing is among the reasons, the wind at the back of improving economy could be another reason.
i don't know. what do you think? >> you don't see the democrats taking the house back? neil: i don't see control changing. >> right, well, what i think, if the election were held tomorrow is democrats win by a couple or republicans hang on by a couple. but they're going to lose seats if history shows that's the case. president trump's numbers are absolutely unprecedented in terms of talks are in the swing districts that they need to defend their majority. not the trump districts where he's beloved. ones they need to hold onto. so that's what makes republicans so nervous. if the tax reform plan is going to change the landscape for them, we're going to see that in the next couple of months and the feeling has to hold. neil: it does. >> if you looked at economy, they're good. trump's overall numbers are terrible. somehow that's going need to change for republicans if they want to make sure that they hold on, lose a few seats but hold onto majority.
neil: part of my thinks and not a right or left thing, when the consensus is saying they're going to lose the house, republicans are going to lose the house. to a.b.'s point, i don't see them losing seats. i don't believe that we've appreciated the magnitude and the positive vibes from this tax cut. whether you like it or not, but that it is far more demonstrable to a lot of folks than was heretofore thought. what do you think of that? >> important point. i want to say, i think there is good reason for republicans to nervous. neil: absolutely. >> no way to sugar coat it. there is something interesting and i remember at the washington examiner early in the spring we were talking to jim jordan and mark meadows about health care legislation and the fix to health care. they said what we need do is get the legislation to a point where people are sitting at kitchen tables, opening up premium bills and saying it went down. that is so important, you can't really understate the importance of that when people are at kitchen tables, looking at finances and see positive
results. that does translate into victory, but there's no reason for republicans not to be nervous. they have a lot to be nervous about. when you get things passed like tax reform, it is powerful. neil: i remember the ronald reagan tax cuts, universally, panned at the time, with the first wave. they came to the middle in the depth of recession and the effect was delayed because republicans did lose a lot of seats in the midterm, but once people started looking at checks and the net return to them, there was a delayed effect but it was a substantial swing in opinion that obviously re-elected ronald reagan in a landslide. do you think that plays out in a different way? the people so appreciate this or look at it, we're in the media, are missing it? >> it won't be a vacuum, the election won't be decided on good feelings of improving economy for some voters, yes, for a lot of voters it's a mix
of things, there's really a question for me, feeling that the trump voter who brought him to power and delivered the presidency for him, may not come out to basically support the republican majority and support congressman joe smith. and so the question is who is turning out in the face of incredible anti-trump energy from white college educated women, independent voters and on and on. so it's what is the check on the anti-trump energy, is it so positive for republicans they have a really good voter turnout? that's going to be, in the end, what determines of the result. neil: you see that rabid energy in one district after another, very different versus a presidential election. ladies, thank you, both very, very much. you know ceos are feeling good these days not because they're getting richer but appreciating the fact that the tax cuts are
going to benefit them, their workers, et cetera. sometimes, not all the time, sometimes there is a direct correlation there. sometimes. that helps the power that be in washington. building a website in under an hour is easy with gocentral... ...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy.
neil: what was a parallel to ronald reagan was his tax cuts, the 80s and the 86 won were ripped by the media at the time. the view of people that saw the net in the paychecks, the sentiment changed. do you expect the same thing to happen with your tax cuts? >> not just that. i mean, look, we didn't even expect the christmas bonuses that went out. we didn't expect the minimum wage increases from large employers across the country. that was more than we expected. we think we underpromised on the tax reform and the impacts that we could have in the economy. neil: so just stick around, people will see. that's coming up from the budget director of the united states, mcmulvaney. the pricewaterhousecoopers survey showing when it comes to bosses, they are feeling more confident. you want your boss in a good mood, if he or she is in a good mood, they are less disposed to
see what a loser you are. steve wynn is the latest ceo saying i'm going to share the wealth. raise wages, give bonuses to workers. he's not the first, probably not the last. crtv.com host deneen borelli is here and michael star hopkins. a lot of angry young men. >> me too. neil: that was from the family. connell mcshane also here. whether this is something appreciated on the magnitude of a lot of bosses, feeling happy, sharing the loot. >> check my files, you are my boss, you look like you are in a good mood. neil: not really. [laughter] . >> you made this point, we had this conversation before that these companies got more money that they knew what to do with and all of a sudden the other things started happening we didn't necessarily account for. looking at the numbers this morning, the president's approval ratings started to
move a little bit, inching up around 40% of the average of the polls. the congressional ballot started to improve. it's negative but survive in the senate with it being underwater. christmastime or theres about, plus 13 in the real clear politics average for the democrats. that was a huge advantage. this morning about plus 8, a little less than that. that is getting better and most of that would be attributed to the economy getting better and people realizing that maybe the tax cuts are better than they thought they were. >> and could be a delayed effect. republicans are counting on, hoping for reagan reduction. deneen, what do you think? >> i want you to be happy as well. i want to keep coming back on the show, neil. neil: this guy is a problem, but maybe. >> this is great news i think for all americans, even today, jpmorgan announced they're going to reinvest $20 billion. >> you are right. that got lost in the sauce. neil: jamie dimon, big
democrat, all based on tax cuts. >> that's right. so more jobs, they're going to provide more loans to small businesses, going to increase wages to the low-wage employees. this is good news all around for all americans. if you're working at at&t, walmart, bb&t, getting bonuses, getting higher wages. other benefits coming down the pike as well. it's all good news for all americans. neil: except michael who constantly whines about it. michael, she mentioned jpmorgan chase, they are increasing wages by 2% for all workers. hiring 4,000 likely. going to be opening up new branches. expand employee bonuses annual award they're calling it to $750 on top of commitments they already made. that's not bad. >> not bad. those are the signs we want to see. neil: you don't want to see. >> we do. democrats want to see a rising tide lift all boats. neil: you don't want it. >> the minimum wage going up to $15. neil: that's happening too!
>> and it is. that is something i think all americans should -- neil: democrats unanimously voted against this. is this going to come back to bite them? >> i don't think so. neil: really? >> absolutely not. look at massachusetts -- neil: but i showed you pretty strong short-term stuff. >> absolutely. we want to see the long-term and make sure this isn't a bubble. this wouldn't be the first time we see the stock market go up. >> i mentioned all that stuff, average folks getting all this money? >> absolutely. we need to make sure we're not trapped in the moment of bonuses and stuff six months to a year. neil: you don't know. >> i got yelled at last time i was here. >> there are the ten democrats in the states that the president won that are up for re-election in the senate, a lot of what -- and i know the base of the democratic party is not happy with senator schumer but a lot of what the vote was about the other day is those types of senators. yeah, for a mccaskill or donnelly or heitkamp or those senators, it's got to be on the
back of their mind, if things are looking better than we thought, do we get the price and much more difficult for the democrats to take, much less the senate. >> i think the democrats are going to have a problem, that's why they have the shutdown happen. it's a grand distraction from what we're seeing in the market. the market is clicking on all cylinders, the stock market, americans see more money starting next month in february in the paycheck. neil: to michael's point, a lot of you don't connect it with the market, they connect with the other stuff. you think the republicans, the president mentioning the markets, i'm paraphrasing, i get a little worried. >> they'll start connecting when they see more money in the wallets. my niece works in the supermarket, she gets way too much money is coming out of my check. she's a young teen. if you're not watching what's going on politically, you start seeing more money in your wallet. if you're getting a $3,000
bonus? my goodness, people have not gotten bonuses wherever they've been working at. they're going to see the proof in the putting and the democrats are going to have a tough time explaining why they did not support the tax cut. neil: what do you think? >> it will be tougher for democrats to make an argument as to the president not being an economic success. people aren't just voting on pocketbooks. neil: they were -- to connell's point, the president's poll numbers would be a lot higher. he hurts himself. >> he will make the argument the president is essentially the bad guy. that is the democratic argument. >> i don't think it's just he's a bad guy. long-term viability, engage with other countries around the world. how americans are looked at. the moral imperatives we deal with. americans don't only vote with pocketbook. neil: the french are leery are us, do you really think so? >> no, but i think there's something people laughing at -- neil: the intrigue.
>> i hope i get an invite. i don't see the president inviting me. if he's watching, come on. neil: guys, thank you all very, very much. i said that the french president macron is coming to first state event that we're going to have under this president, and it will be the french. end of april. be there. i think we'll send connell. >> just the right one. neil: holding a cocktail, escargot. more after this. ...
neil: welcome back to cavuto coast to coast i'm nicole petallides live on the floor of the new york stock exchange a close look at netflix mix of the earnings season up 9.3% right now news to an all-time high, easily crosses into that hundred billion mark the cap like many in the tech companies have done recently you could see year-to-date it's up 29% it is number one in the s & p 500, added 2 million more subscribers than the analysts anticipated and its gotten upgrades.
then we're taking a look at the other names that have reported today from the dow jones industrial average proctor and gamble, johnson & johnson, verizon are all to the downside with proctor and gamble and johnson & johnson each dropping 3%, travelers at a new high up 5 % on the growth that the company has been seeing so that is a real winner today. neil? neil: nicole thank you very very much. to nicole's point a lot of wind at the back for these traders here but especially when it comes to initial public offerings, we had a bit of a stumble to start when the year began but they're making up for lost time here 10 big ones coming in the next couple of weeks here. in fact the buy in as we kickoff this month could be the highest dollar wise we seen in about 10 years. what does that mean larry, market watch, when we normally see something like this, larry obviously companies are optimistic. the argument for that is they're getting in when the getting is good just in case something bad
happens what do you think? >> yeah, it's a fair point, neil but look, the continued robust investor appetite for stocks is fueling this advance coupled with the overall improving investor sentiment and look this is the animal spirits coming out people are warming up to the pro -business climate & companies are warming up to less regulation and less of a financial burden making it easier for them to be a publicly traded company but at the same time it's a paradigm shift neil. for the last three years we've had buybacks of company stock, buyouts of private companies and bond issuance as a way to raise money. that's all changing the paradigm shift is going back to the traditional equity market there's a shortage of stocks out there. we have half the number of stock s we had in the mid 90s and half the number of ipo's so it's a long time coming and this aspect is know the bubble but it happens when the markets warmed up and the markets have advanced which we certainly seen. neil: so glad you mentioned that because one of the other fundamental factors in this entire market advance is there aren't nearly as many stocks as there used to be so you have
roughly the same number of buyer s if you want to accept that there are more now actually chasing fewer issues than all of that. the weird thing is we have a lot more mutual funds but that's a separate argument. do you worry though that the animal spirits you a lewd to whatever are getting ahead of themselves here though that there are those that say you know we haven't had so much as a 5% correction let alone healthier 10% one in all of that what do you think? >> i think it's again, fair point. look we have to make the distinction we have an improving strengthening global economy if you look at growth outside the u.s. it's very strong the strongest its been in a long time. growth in the u.s. is improving so we see this really strong economic texture but at some point you might get ahead of yourself and the potential some sectors of the market where market money is coming in at a rapid clip not distinguishing between value and trash just going into the markets so that is somewhat fueling this concern and some of that money will get miss allocated. you'll get a correction neil.
no doubt you'll get a correction neil: we haven't repealed them you're absolutely right. real quickly but one source of concern is the president getting tougher on trade and these tariffs on south korea and you know, chinese players, this could escalate into something bad. what do you think? >> that's right. i think the market would certainly not like a trade war and that's a risk out there among many geo-political concerns so something we have to be really careful of, vigilant and watch and want it to be a pro-business decision but again it's a risk that we all wake up and face every day. neil: all right larry thank you very very much. the only reason i like him is even with the dawn of trump as it were when a lot of people were getting antsy about what he could mean in the markets larry was saying fire ahead full cylinders, so whatever you think of the president personally, was he right or left, bull or bear, he was very pressing about that. that was a very very good call on his part. we are mentioning the fact that the president is going to be
neil: well, it's not as if the president didn't threaten this enough, he said he would do it and a lot of people are surprised in a matter of minutes he will in fact do it. the president is said to unveil paris things that come largely from china, washing machines and dryers that come largely from south korea. jeff flock at a solar facility outside chicago and how all this is going down. jeff? >> yeah, neil you know these things are tricky on trade and these two industries are tricky also. we're at a solar power installation, this is ex exelon, the largest solar power generating station in the country, urban one that is, and
you know, it's tricky on these things. solar, it will be a 30% tariff on imported panels like the ones that you see on washers, washing machines a 50% tariff and they will both be transitioned out after a number of years but look at the solar stocks today that tells you why it's tricky. some of the companies that make the panels here in this country doing pretty well today but some like sun power which did the installation where i am here in chicago, they domainly installation. if you do mainly installation you're kind of not happy about it because it figures to raise prices up and probably lead to less installations. in fact the solar power industry says it will be 23,000 fewer jobs. little less complicated on the washing machine side this whole thing was started by whirlpool, big u.s. company makes a lot of washing machines, maytag makes a lot of other branded washing machines. their stock is up today and the
folks at whirlpool is saying " this announcement caps a decade of litigation that will result in new jobs in ohio, kentucky, south carolina, tennessee. it's a victory for american workers." it's probably a loss for companies like lg and samsung, which make a lot of washing machines also and bring them into this country and also may mean that we pay a little bit more for a washing machine, but i don't know, prices are pretty cheap on washing machines now. what do you think? neil: i don't know. it's a 50% tariff, that could be a big one. are they worried though this lasts a long time or this is more the power of a threat? >> well, these are going to phase out and i think they're worried that it goes somewhere from here that's the worry. this particular, you know i think in the solar power industry it could be trouble because that tariff could be high enough to drive up prices and kill the industry, but then not high enough to increase more
manufacturing here, so it's where it goes from here i think is a big fear. neil: jeff flock thank you my friend very very much. so the fallout on all of this if the president then goes as far as some say he will and set the stage for maybe down the road killing off nafta, could that just undo this entire rally, to turning point usa founder executive director charlie kirk and market senator. john, market guys typically worry about that sort of thing, think that trade wars are never good. they go back to the argument that brought on the great depression of the 30s. what do you think? >> they're absolutely right. this is a very irresponsible thing from donald trump. the simple truth is if we don't allow foreigners to sell to us, they will be unable to buy from us. if you go back to smoot holly, that was a tariff on 20,000 plus goods this led to a massive decline in u.s. exports from 5.2 billion in 1929 to 1.7 by 1932 and the reason for that, we
shut ourselves off to the world. they shut themselves off to us . this is not a path you want to go down. neil: charlie what do you think? >> well john, look i'm a free-trade guy and i believe in markets but here is one thing the president has done that's rather effective and he gets a bad rap for being an anti- free-trade president. let's look at what the new deal he negotiated with china in regards to cattle. for years for whatever reason the united states has not allowed to sell one of our greatest assets which was u.s. grass fed beef and he lifted that restriction so free-trade is not just being able to buy goods from other countries. it's also being able to sell our goods to other countries and look korea if you look at the tariffs they've imposed on our products over the last 20 years it's incomprehensible so this is a negotiation tactic and of course we want to strive towards a market where we can sell our goods and buy goods freely and openly but the problem is other countries have been posing 30, 40, 50% tariffs on our products in their marketplace for far too long this is a negotiation tactic and i think appropriate
retaliation for these unfair trade practices that have been enacted. neil: well, i would hope it is limited, charlie but history teaches us though the ones who get caught in the crossfire are average consumers. average americans who are looking let's say at that lg washer or dryer from south korea being 50% more, and that, john, then invites all sorts of anger. what do you think? >> yeah, let's remember why do we get up and go to work every day? we work because we want to import it can be from across the streator the other site of the world. the imports are our award for working and the tariffs penalize the worker so just as other countries want to injure themselves and injuring other people by disallowing american goods doesn't mean we should compound them by doing something equally ridiculous. neil: but to charlie's point if it's working for them and they are getting the better part of the deal we've got to respond don't we? >> how is it working for them? we're the richest country in the world. neil: but china exports more to anyone else, do you know what i
mean? >> that's correct. >> but the purpose of work is to import. we've got the average tariff of 1.4% that's why we're a rich country. we take in the world's goods that's why you work in the first place. neil: i didn't mean to jump on you guys but the president has effectively signed this, the idea to go after chinese solar panel manufactures and largely south korea an washer makers, lg , i'd say would be in there but they say this could extend we'll be getting some comments from the white house shortly when that is sent to us. we'll share it but charlie your point? >> yeah, and i do want to reiterate this that i think the discussion is always one street when looking at what the president is dog. he has liberated so many markets so that u.s. goods and natural resources can be sold internationally. look at the deal he signed so that u.s.-based coal with be sold in southeast asia. so free-trade again is not just being able to buy goods and services from other countries. it's being able to export our goods and services and i would have a point of disagreement. we go to work obviously for fulfillment to provide for our family and people around us but you need to be able to sell your
goods and services to be able to do that and when you have an up tapped market of 1.5 billion people and the countries are not allowing goods and services to penetrate that market and president trump has opened up those countries that's something worthy of recognition and you look at china. they steal our intellectual property and they heavily subsidize these industries as well. the solar panel industry is heavily subsidized by the chinese government and we're supposed to compete against that i don't think so. neil: just be careful what you wish for because it can come back to bite you but it's a little too early. again thank you guys the president has effectively signed this. the first trade sanctions we have seen now in about 20 plus years here. now, the idea is that it's limited these products largely solar panels, largely washers and dryers from south korea but not exclusively. little more after this. building a website in under an hour is easy with gocentral...
neil: all right, we should be getting something fed to us from the white house where the president of course on these matt res where he's cracking down on these who try to undercut the price of things like solar panels, washers and dryers from south korea and china he does not imply that nafta is going to be served on a pitch fork and thrown out, in fact he's confident by the way that they can avoid just that sort of thing so we'll keep an eye on that.
in the meantime, my buddy deodara bolton is here, rupert m urdoch rings a bell and he's calling for a change between facebook how it deals with its new sources, how it pays for them and i guess because it don't pay now, but what's going on? >> so i think his main argument is that these companies and you and i have been talking about this for months that facebook and google really should be treated equally as much as media companies as tech companies so when companies such as ourselves or any of the newspapers, wall street journal, washington post, new york times when facebook is posting these, that content, facebook is not giving any money to any of the newspapers or any of the content providers and mr. murdoch is saying maybe that should change because their algorithms have become and i'll use his words inherent inherent ly unrealliable so it was a surprise announcement from mr. murdock but honestly a lot of analysts are saying facebook and google had this coming. neil: is this in response to
facebook saying it would allow people to grade the reliability of their content? >> exactly so i think facebook is trying to find the right formula and without having spoken personally to mr. murdock by guess is saying well while you're at it why don't you consider paying for the content that is making your pipeline more used. facebook -- neil: he does have a good point. he does have a very good point and he also made the point it's really not going to cost these companies which by the way have a lot of cash. it's not going to cost them a lot to pay for content as the cable provider would, so it's really the analogy is just make those pipes be the same pay for pipes as cable pipes are and we are the content creators. i think the point is somewhat buttressed as well because remember with our election presidential year last year of course facebook said oh, no no no our algorithms, this system cannot be mangled with it cannot be messed with and then it had to do this huge thing okay is it like an 80,000 posts from russia from russian sources did get
through and close to 130 million people saw them over two years. facebook itself has widened an investigation into the uk to see if the same thing happened with the brexit vote. we know in italy there's a big election coming up in march so that's the next big test to see to what extent these social media companies have in fill infiltrated so the idea is your algorithms are not reliable. if you are going to try to raise the profile and increase the credibility by reaching out to sources, which are journalists at the end of the day, we actually do serve a purpose, maybe you should pay for that. which is kind of logical. neil: but again, it's picking and choosing your sources here. >> it is and getting back to your point, facebook did say they are going to be selecting via algorithm more trust worth it sources but they weren't clear about the metrics they were using to judge that. neil: who decides that? >> they weren't publishing a list. neil: i've got the impression they were allowing their
customers to do that. >> right that is part of their last release was -- neil: but how could you do that? right you can't do both and that's facebook's challenge is they have a foot sort of in both fields and they just have to figure out which direction they're going in and i think murdock is suggesting a very practical business solution. why don't you just do what cable companies do which is when you know that there's a source that's trustworthy okay you pay them the small fee that they get would get anyway. neil: but if you're on facebook, there are quite a few people that is their source for news. it's done through facebook. e-mail, communicate through that , they get their news through that. >> more than 2 billion users. i mean that's one of the world's most populous countries. neil: you know, this internet thing is going to be huge. >> [laughter] neil: you heard that from me. thank you, very very much. you have a call from a rupert murdoch. >> yeah exactly. neil: i don't know what that's about. all right we're waiting to hear from the president of the united states that will outline this
executive order and he says it's not a trade war. it does not mean necessarily that nafta is going by way of the garbage can here but this is targeted at china largely south korea, china for solar panels undercutting american makers and in the case of south korea, washers and dryers that are undercutting u.s. manufactures like whirlpool. so if you're looking for a washer let's say from lg you were saying maybe? as of today it could be 50% more more after this. and then you totaled him. you two had been through everything together. two boyfriends, three jobs... you're like nothing can replace brad. then liberty mutual calls... and you break into your happy dance. if you sign up for better car replacement™, we'll pay for a car that's a model year newer with 15,000 fewer miles than your old one. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
neil: this idea we're maybe getting that a trade are war with the chinese and south koreans is too soon to tell. we are getting information from tape fed to us from the white house where the president we're told is talking about this jeff sessions talking to the special counsel robert mueller. not concerned about that. of course it got into this whole idea whether this was back and forth on trade. that could undo these markets f that is a fear the markets have funny way of showing it. it had been down a little bit here. a lot of this riding on the heels of the tax plan and the fact, excuse me, i'm choking up about this that we will avoid a government shutdown more than the three days we were already looking at. trish regan to take you through that. save my voice meantime. trish. trish: i know it is easy to tear
up these things. here is the president right now speaking. let's listen in. >> many, many decades. we're very proud of it. that is why the stock market is reaging the way it is. thank you very, very much. [shouting questions] >> i'm not at all. not at all. the. reporter: did you talk to him. >> not at all concerned. thank you very much. [shouting questions] >> no, he did not, not even a little bit, nope. he is going to do a good job. [inaudible] >> thanks, everyone. >> we're looking at, looking at a lot of things. reporter: are you concerned about this new situation with the fbi? >> we'll see how it all works out. reporter: are you concerned about a trade war with -- [inaudible] >> thank you all. neil: trish: president speaking with to reporters. he announced putting tariffs on washing machines and other big picket items coming in from